Congrats on passing the exam, and we're looking for you on CW.

Beware one-tube transmitters that put out 10W...although I think it's fun to use one, and fun to hear them on the air, it's almost impossible to make one sound good; reason is, changing in PA loading and plate current influence the oscillator stage and pull the frequency.  Most all "one tube" transmitters have a "chirp."  However, as I said, it is fun to hear them, and a chirp is not illegal!

73 & keep up the good work!

Steve WB2WIK/6

Yes, I was referring to "unzipped," with the conductors very close and held in place by their original insulation.

On 40m, the difference, if you're feeding a resonant loop, between "unzipped" (70 Ohms) vs. "zipped apart" (450-600 Ohms) should be essentially nothing, because the line loss will be extremely low either way.  However, if you need to feed the 40m loop on other bands where its impedance might swing wildly, e.g., 20m where its impedance can get very high, the "zipped apart" (open wire type) construction will work better.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

Of course you can.  It's not "open wire," but it is "balanced," and much lower impedance (typically) than open wire or ladder line would be, due to the close conductor spacing.

I've used "zip cord" (lamp cord, typically #18 gauge stranded copper with plastic insulation) lots of time as a transmission line on 40 meters, even on 10 meters, and it's pretty good stuff...around 70 Ohms impedance or so, not much loss -- probably about as good as RG58/U coax on those frequencies.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

I just don't think the stuff would sell well enough to cover the investment of setting up any manufacturing.

I know Denny Had, K8KXK -- as you probably know, he used to own & run "Dentron" back in the 1970's.  And I think he found out that even that roller-coaster ride, which probably peaked in success back in about 1974, bottomed out quickly and went belly-up.

To run a small business as a sideline venture, or a hobby, is one thing; but to make a real business out of it is quite something else.  I wish I had time for the "hobby business" thing...it would really be a lot of fun.  Sigh.  Maybe in retirement!

73 Steve WB2WIK/6

Interesting idea, but I don't think there'd be much market for it.  The market for high-end vacuum tube audio equipment is miniscule, which is why the prices are so high -- and there are millions more "audiophiles" in the world than there are hams.

Also, "new" circuit design based on tubes is nonexistent; thus, performance of a brand-new design for 2001 would be about the same as the older tube stuff from Collins, Drake, Heathkit, et al. 30 years ago.  Where would improved performance come from?  It cannot.

Since a new design would not be superior to those existing in the 1970's, it would be far less expensive to simply buy, restore and use the old gear, much of which was incredibly well designed.  How would I make an AM transmitter today that could perform better (that is, sound better on the air) than a Johnson Ranger or Valiant, or Heath Apache, or Collins 32V?  I couldn't -- it would take financing a transformer shop to manufacture high-powered modulation transformers that haven't been made in decades...

However, if there are venture capitalists nutty enough to finance a new amateur radio manufacturing venture based on vacuum tube designs, I'd happily offer consulting services for circuit design work.  I was pretty good at it back in 1970, and still have my old vacuum tube handbooks...!!

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

If cost were no object, I'd say the ACOM 2000A.  It's slick, fast, easy and extremely reliable by both design and reputation.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

I agree the CW decoders are practically useless in contests...too much close-packed QRM, often within a few Hz...and the contest exchange is so short that any bonehead can copy what is required for the contest log (a callsign and zone, for example -- the "59" or "599" is filled in by the contest logging software!).  

I own, and have used, the MFJ keyboard keyer.  It works great (not contesting, just general purpose operation, ragchewing, etc), is RFI-free and has zero problems.  But it's just not fun!  I think a lot of the fun of CW operating is sitting back and listening to what the other station is sending, and then sitting up to send with a paddle...the fun is diminished by too much automation.  At first, I liked the MFJ because it allowed me to reply immediately to comments or questions posed by the other station...such as, if the other guy said, "WX here is very cold, we had two feet of snow today..." I could immediately send into the MFJ buffer memory, "Oh, too bad abt ur WX, here it's sunny and warm..." and do this while I was still listening to the rest of his transmission.  I'm a fast typist (about 120wpm), so keying in quick comments like this only takes a few seconds and doesn't distract me from the QSO.

Then, all my comments are stored in the MFJ buffer, and when the other station turns it over to me, I just hit "enter," and if the speed is adjusted to 20wpm, the machine will send several sentences without me doing anything.  I could literally walk out of the room for a cup of coffee, and come back, and "I" would still be sending!  That seemed like fun, for a while.

But, after a while, like most anything new, it just wasn't fun.  Not nearly as much fun as using the paddle, making occasional mistakes to prove my humanity, etc.  Automation for contesting is fine and helps improve scores.  Automation in everyday life is, um, boring-?

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

Vacuum tubes don't lend themselves to such an application, as the input and output transformers required for broadband use in the RF spectrum are difficult to design or build without having substantial loss.  A 200W (input power) vacuum-tube transmitter might operate with a plate voltage of 900V and plate current of 222mA.  This represents a plate load impedance of 4054 Ohms.  To use this with a 50 Ohm antenna system requires a transformation ratio of 81:1.  Try to build a broadband (1.5 - 30 MHz) transformer, capable of withstanding this voltage and current, having an impedance ratio of about 80:1.  Let me know how that works out!

This is the problem with vacuum tubes.  They lend themselves to medium and high powered, broadband audio frequency applications (20 Hz - 20,000 Hz) because the appropriate matching transformers can be wound using iron cores, and those devices are commercially available from manufacturers whose specialty is doing exactly this for the past several decades.  No such transformers exist for wideband RF applications in the appropriate ratios.

Solid-state PA's lend themselves much better to wideband, "no tune" applications because the impedance transformation ratios are so much easier to achieve.  A 14V operated, 200W PA will have a collector (or drain) impedance of about 1 Ohm.  The operating voltage is so low that insulation is not a concern, so any kind of wire (of a gauge to support the operating current) can be wound on a large ferrite form to create a low-loss output transformer.  It's just an easier, more appropriate design.

There have been "broadband" vacuum tube PA's of functional design; however, these are normally either:

1.  Conventional pi-network or pi-L network designs using motor-driven components (capacitors, inductors or both) and phase detector/servo motor systems which rapidly tune the PA to resonance after a frequency change.  Not really "broadband," but very user-friendly, and the end result is similar to a broadband amplifier; or,

2.  Conventional network designs using pre-set network components that allow tuning for resonance at the bottom, center and top end of each band, thus creating a "bandpass" network effect.  It may never be completely resonant anywhere useful, and will never be quite as efficient as tuning for resonance at one frequency, but can be made to work pretty well.  The problem with this is, the tuning will be extremely dependant upon excellent antenna matching.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

It definitely has some value, but might be of more value to a Yaesu "collector" than to the average ham or SWL.  

You might place a free ad and ask for "best offer," and see what you get!

73 Steve WB2WIK/6

Welcome to the hobby!

The FL/FR101 are really seriously old.  Not as old as your BC348 (!), but old.  Neither the scope nor the phone patch (it's not an autopatch) will help make any contacts, although they are interesting accessories.

Because the scope is a reasonably high-demand item for some reason, this setup probably is worth $450, assuming everything works properly.  Without the scope, I'd say more like $250-$300.  Due to the age of this equipment, it does not cover the WARC bands and it lacks many of the standard features found in today's equipment.

For overall enjoyment of the HF bands, I'd probably recommend forgoing this station and picking up a used but more modern HF transceiver -- one that does not require constant transmitter tuning-up as the FL101 will.  Solid-state rigs with more of the modern features abound in the $450 price range.  Nobody needs the scope, and the phone patch isn't worth much.

As for "working DX," that is all up to the antennas and the operator.  The station equipment has very little to do with DX-worthiness.  The antennas do all the work, the equipment merely facilitates using the antennas.  And the station operator does the rest of the work!  An experienced DX'er can work DX with practically nothing for equipment, whereas a newcomer might take some time to make even that first contact.  But learning how to do it is definitely part of the overall ham radio experience, and it's very much a fun part!

Good luck & have fun!

Steve WB2WIK/6

Sure.  The 22'er Mk II was the second-generation Clegg 22'er, built by E.T. Clegg Labs in New Jersey.

It was an AM transceiver that ran 40W output power, plate modulated, with a 144-148 MHz tunable receiver and a built-in (but separately controlled) VFO for the transmitter.  It had a built-in 120Vac power supply.  Just add a microphone and antenna and you're on the air.

This was actually a very nice rig, and had great modulation, as did all Clegg products.  (Clegg was a real fussbudget about modulation -- if it didn't sound great, he didn't want to sell it.)

Rig was on the market in, oh, about 1970, for a couple of years and was one of the last products ever made by Clegg -- although the two meter FM units, the FM27, FM27A and FM27B, and the FM28 that followed, kept Clegg popular in ham circles for a few more years.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

What did the problem turn out to be?

It's nice to be pleased with the service, but I'd be more disappointed that an IC-746, which cannot be very old, should even need service!  Good grief, my TS850S/AT was born in 1989 and, after being used virtually 7 days a week for the past 12 years, has never required any service...nor has my older Drake TR7A, which dates back to 1977.  It's been used 43,680 hours (combined transmitting/receiving) over 23 years and has never had the cover removed, since I installed an optional filter & noise blanker 23 years ago.

Good service is nice, but what about "service life?"  

WB2WIK/6

That's ridiculous.

Why not simply buy a surplus Variac (voltage variable transformer) and do this, yourself?  You wouldn't need a large one, a 5A unit (or higher current rated) would do just fine.  

Readily available new, but also available less expensively used, from Fair Radio Sales (Lima, OH), http://www.fairradio.com

Just wire it up with a plug and a socket, plug in the equipment, and slowly crank up the voltage from "zero" to "full" over a period of a few minutes.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

Check out:

<http://www.arrl.org/w1aw/prop/2001-arlp021.html>

This on-line, continuously updated resource explains what the numbers mean in layman's terms and provides details predicting how the solar flux indicators affect propagation for the amateur bands.

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6

I'd suggest you ask the proprietor of INRAD, George Cutsogeorge, W2VJN...he is likely to have good information for you:

W2VJN@rosenet.net

73 de Steve WB2WIK/6